Arşiv

📂 01) - PDF-No-1

This 109-page folder contains social assessments, medical certificates, applications for assistance, correspondence with lawyers, and court documents concerning legal guardianship. 2005 — Support recommended by Inna Ziporius The documents dated 12 and 27 January 2005 describe mouldy, damp accommodation, deteriorating health, and the need for assistance with moving, furnishing the home, debts, and dealings with authorities. Inna Ziporius recommends an initial six months of Betreutes Einzelwohnen — BEW, individual supported living, under SGB XII §§ 67–68. Harald Lilge’s letter of 1 August 2005, reference L 076/05, states that the Bezirksamt refused to cover the costs of that support. Citing eligibility for assistance under the AsylbLG, the lawyer considers challenging the refusal inadvisable. 1 August is the date of the lawyer’s letter; the exact date of the original refusal decision is not specified here. These documents concern the funding of social support, rather than the appointment of Ziporius as a legal guardian. (Pages 3–7.) 2006–2007 — Continuing need for assistance and medical warnings On 15 March 2006, Lilge contacts the psychosocial coordination department of Bezirksamt Mitte. He states that an individual support worker is needed to help manage daily life, correspondence, and numerous problems; that he cannot replace such a worker himself; and that Rustem is increasingly losing hope in continuing to live. The folder also contains applications for Grundsicherung, basic income support, and the refusal dated 17 January 2007. These concern a separate social assistance matter. The 25/27 September 2006 assessment of capacity for work, certificates concerning physical illnesses, and the need for continuing treatment are presented. The medical certificate issued by Dr. Christian Seyfried on 1 February 2007 contains the expression being sought: it records that Rustem “states that he has become a victim of our state.” The doctor himself confirms severe psychological tension, a depressive condition, and suicidal intentions, and requests support to prevent further deterioration. (Pages 8–18, 42, 45–50.) 2007 — Guardianship proceedings: 50 XVII 6504 The court record dated 6 June 2007 states that assistance from a legal guardian was requested, including someone who speaks Turkish or Russian. On 7 June, Amtsgericht Tiergarten initiates an expert assessment and a social assessment. The letter dated 1 August 2007, on Saliha Gülfirat’s letterhead, requests a Turkish-speaking guardian who understands legal matters. Subsequent submissions state that she helped prepare the letter; there is no decision here appointing Gülfirat as Rustem’s guardian. The expert, Dr. Waltraut Wille, reports that she could not establish contact. On 6 September, the court warns of the possibility of being brought to an examination by the police. On 9 November, the appointment of a guardian is refused on the stated grounds that no expert opinion had been obtained and there had been no cooperation with the examination. The objection of 11 December describes forgetfulness, serious illnesses, and difficulties keeping track of medical appointments. (Pages 19–38.) 2008 — Applications to higher courts • 16 January — Amtsgericht: maintains its previous position. • 18 April — Landgericht Berlin, 87 T 25/08: dismisses the appeal. • 26 June — Kammergericht, 1 W 187/08: does not examine the merits, citing failure to meet the requirement for a lawyer’s signature or submission recorded by the court registry. • 8 October — Bundesgerichtshof, XII ZB 131/08: states that the law provides no further legal remedy against that decision; it also rejects the application for Prozesskostenhilfe, legal aid. • Bundesverfassungsgericht, AR 6660/08: its letters of 21 October and 21 November explain requirements concerning substantiation, submission of decisions, and deadlines. These are not decisions on the merits. The folder also contains the objections of 11 November and 24 December. Documents concerning other proceedings included here Applications addressed to the lawyers Jörn Wobbe, Jörg Heynemann, and Holger Lampert, together with demands concerning rent, electricity, cable television, and E-Plus debts, are also included. The letters mention S 88 AY 135/07, VG 15 A 281/07, S 49 SO 3809/05, S 49 AY 127/07, 84 AR 17/07, 1 Ws 287/07, L 1 SF 244/07, and L 1 241/07. The Kammergericht decision separately mentions 55 S 67/07, while personal submissions refer to the earlier 528 Qs 49/03, 52 Js 7/00 (349/00), 251a/251b Ds, and Strasbourg 6859/08 references. These are not the case numbers of the guardianship proceedings; they show parallel disputes and the need for assistance. The personal objections raise allegations of obstruction of legal protection, serious damage to health, being driven into a suicidal crisis, and a demand for accountability under StGB § 339 — Rechtsbeugung, intentional perversion of justice. The boundary between the folders The requests for assistance in this PDF must not be presented as consent to the specific guardians appointed subsequently. The appointments of Kaufmann, Stephan, and Birant, and the objections to their conduct, belong to the second and third folders. The objections sent from Istanbul concerning those appointments will be presented separately in the Turkey–Istanbul folder.